Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

howtobrexit.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 142 posts

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#121

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ben_w wrote: post #64
martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

Perhaps oddly, despite being on the losing side of this referendum, I have not change my mind about the value and importance of even simple majority referendums (referenda?) like the one I just lost. Rather, I think it is absolutely important to inform the electorate and to make sure that propaganda is effectively prevented. I have literally no idea how to do any of that. If “the people” cannot be convinced of your a…

It's not just Leave vs. Remain, and it's not just the UK. In the US, the two sides can't talk to each other at all either. Something broke in our ability to have a national conversation.

Personally, I think the problem is that social media means that too much of the conversation is in echo chambers, and echo chambers are terrible at fairly considering the other side's view.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#122

Post by AnimalMuppet »

dev_dull wrote: post #55
martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

The same 51% will just vote for a populist candidate to push their agenda. You can’t escape it by playing games with required thresholds. Brexit happened because people wanted it to happen.

That's not enough. You can vote for a populist, your 51% can get the populist elected, but they have to work through the regular system to get anything done, and the regular system has (very deliberate) checks and balances to keep one office holder from doing too much damage.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#123

Post by dev_dull »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #122
dev_dull wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same 51% will just vote for a populist candidate to push their agenda. You can’t escape it by playing games with required thresholds. Brexit happened because people wanted it to happen.

That's not enough. You can vote for a populist, your 51% can get the populist elected, but they have to work through the regular system to get anything done, and the regular system has (very deliberate) checks and balances to keep one office holder from doing too much damage.

At that point you’re intentionally going against the will of the people and calling it a virtue.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#124

Post by ben_w »

zimablue wrote: post #115
kybernetikos wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Norway is part of the ECHR. In fact, just like the UK it was a founding member of the Council of Europe which agreed to create the ECHR at the Congress of Europe at which Winston Churchill was a delegate from the UK. The ECHR is a separate institution to the EU anyway so I'm not sure why it would be relevant. Leaving the EU does not leave the ECHR, and there has been no referendum to suggest that the UK should do tha…

You're right on Norway being a member of the ECHR, I wasn't sure as I stated in my post, but you're vastly oversimplifying by implying there's no connection https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-3614979...

Russia is in the EHCR, so I think it’s very reasonable to say it’s a separate institution.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#125

Post by AnimalMuppet »

dev_dull wrote: post #123
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not enough. You can vote for a populist, your 51% can get the populist elected, but they have to work through the regular system to get anything done, and the regular system has (very deliberate) checks and balances to keep one office holder from doing too much damage.

At that point you’re intentionally going against the will of the people and calling it a virtue.

Yes, I am, following the explicitly stated intent of the authors of the United States Constitution. They deliberately did not want direct democracy, fearing mob rule.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#126

Post by jamie_ca »

martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

BC Native, here. We're now staring down our 3rd referendum on switching to Proportional Representation.

2005 Referendum was 57.7% Yes, 61% turnout, required 60% to pass.

2009 Referendum was 39% Yes, 55% turnout, required 60% to pass.

This year, we get to vote on both Yes/No, as well as rank three possible systems - current polls are 32% no, 33% yes, 33% undecided, and MMP with 49% support. To pass, we require only 50% Yes votes, but there's a clause that will have us do a followup in 8 years (2 election cycles) as to whether to keep the PR system or go back to FPTP.

I'm very happy with the "50% but built-in allowance for takebacks" setup this time around.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#127

Post by arountheworld »

wlll wrote: post #106
arountheworld wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland%E2%80%93Russia_border Check the "Border area" section. I see no reason why something similar couldn't be implemented for Northern Ireland.

> Because Kaliningrad Oblast is small, homogeneous and an exclave within the European Union That's not the same situation as NI.

In such situations, people suddenly lose the ability to draw similarities... it is funny actually when someone makes up their mind and becomes immune to ideas that could break their fortress.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#128

Post by Latteland »

mattmanser wrote: post #54
bilbo0s wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I'm not familiar enough with the monarchical aspect of their government to know how (if?) that would go down? But you make a good point. Why can't their queen or whatever just say no we're not leaving? I'm not sure? I'm from the US. We don't have the whole monarchy thing going on.

Because the position (and power) is symbolic and the centuries old understanding is that the ruling monarch will never exercise it. Should they do so, especially in opposition to a full referendum of all things, it would spell the end of the monarchy. The last time royal assent was refused in the UK was in 1708: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Militia_Bill

What if the king or queen was a crazy bastard hell bent or just too stupid to do anything but destroy your normal democratic behaviors and support authoritarian practices? I think you've been lucky up to now, at least for the recent 100 years.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#129

Post by dev_dull »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #125
dev_dull wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At that point you’re intentionally going against the will of the people and calling it a virtue.

Yes, I am, following the explicitly stated intent of the authors of the United States Constitution. They deliberately did not want direct democracy, fearing mob rule.

Then you must be in favor of institutions such as the electorate college.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#130

Post by [deleted] »

songshu wrote: post #52
martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

The problem with Brexit is that "leave the European Union" is not a policy, it's an outcome. All of the thinking about how to do it should have taken place before the vote, and then we could have voted on that (this is actually the way legislation is typically developed in the UK, and the job of our sometime venerated civil service). Compare it to the recent Irish referendum on abortion, where there was a clear plan…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN